Dr. W ALKkER-AnNOTT on Samara læta, Linn. 367 
In Carey's edition of Roxburgh's * Flora Indica, vol. ii. pp. 299 and 300, Dr. 
Wallich has described two plants, for which Alph. DeCandolle has since con- 
stituted the genus Choripetalum. Of the one, Ch. undulatum, the female only is 
known, and the analysis accords well with that of the female of Samara leta: we 
find the same short stamens, thickish style and stigma in both. Of the second, 
Ch. aurantiacum, Dr. Wallich only knew the male, in which the stamens were 
twice the length of the petals, and the ovary rudimentary without any style: 
but in his * List,’ No. 2299, he associates with it a specimen from Dr. Wight 
in fruit; and, as a corresponding one from Dr. Wight is before me, I am en- 
abled to refer to Dr. Wallich's, and consequently to M. Alph. DeCandolle's 
plant with considerable certainty, although there were no specimens of either 
among the valuable collections I received from Dr. Wallich. Since Dr. Wight's 
return to India, he has met with the same at Quilon, and I believe there only ; 
and among the specimens transmitted to me are three forms, all agreeing in 
habit, inflorescence and foliage, sent without any hesitation as one species. 
One of these shows the stamens exserted, and accords well with Dr. Wal- 
lich’s description ; a second has the flowers expanded, but the petals shorter, 
and the stamens about the length of the corolla; the third is in immature 
fruit. The differences are certainly not less than in the three forms of the 
Samara læta alluded to. It may be said, that the second form with expanded 
flowers and short stamens might, when further developed, have exhibited the 
stamens elongated, but in their present state they are more developed than 
in the Banksian specimens of the S. læta; and if we allow that the stamens 
would have been elongated when fully developed in the one case, we may in 
the other. I cannot satisfy myself however that such is the cause in either 
case; but I refer to this parallel instance to bear on the point, that there 
seems no reason for supposing that the six specimens of S. læta differ spe- 
cifically*. In 1833, while examining the genus Hedyotis, I was much struck 
with the great length of the filaments on some specimens and their shortness 
on others of what I could not otherwise believe to be distinct species: in 
these the style was usually in an inverse proportion, but in both states was 
fertile. I am by no means certain if the structure in Samara or Choripetalum 
ought to be considered analogous. 
" have no doubt that the inconstancy in the length of the stamens applies to Myrsine; and there- 
fore that some of the sections proposed by M. Alph. DeCandolle are of no value. 
VOL. XX. 3c 
